How can we improve the patch contests?

[hakey]

I'm wondering what people think about the two patches per person limit - is it really necessary?

[Shabdahbriah]

I'm wondering what people think about the two patches per person limit - is it really necessary?

I like the idea, if for no other reason than the difficulty of trying to target, or pick just ONE.

Moreover, having "two" as a target was inspiring for me from the standpoint of diversity, without being either under/overwhelming.

I don't feel it "limiting", as much as I feel strongly about having a greater number (allowed) would be potentially intimidating or discouraging for those who are less (or not at all) inclined to participate, and give an unfair advantage (quantity wise) to those for whom it comes easily.

[2c]

[hakey]

would be potentially intimidating or discouraging for those who are less (or not at all) inclined to participate, and give an unfair advantage (quantity wise) to those for whom it comes easily.

Yes, that is the argument for the limit.

I'm just not so sure that it necessarily give an unfair advantage. I mean, someone who wanted to win would likely do better if they put their efforts into making one or two really well crafted patches than several mediocre ones.

Removing the limit, or increasing it, would hopefully result in a few more patches, which might make a bit of a difference on those occasions that there's a lower turnout.

And the OSC's seem to work well enough without placing a limit on submissions.

[satYatunes]

I am not able to recall the rules and I always thought it's mandatory to submit two patches? Submitting only one patch is still okay..right? I don't see any problem in keeping the limit to two however I don't see any advantage of increasing it either... good turn out should be the one where we get more participants not patches...

[Shabdahbriah]

... good turn out should be the one where we get more participants not patches...

+1

[hakey]

I am not able to recall the rules and I always thought it's mandatory to submit two patches?

From the current contest: "Simply create one or two patches"

[ghettosynth]

...

[hakey]

... good turn out should be the one where we get more participants not patches...

+1

hmm, I agree +1 and disagree -1

IMO the success of the contest is some function of the number of participants + the number of patches + quality of patches.

If someone has three, four or five equally brilliant patches but only submits two of them, surely in that case the contest is the lesser for it?

[hakey]

And the OSC's seem to work well enough without placing a limit on submissions.

I don't think that you can compare creating a patch to creating a track.

I wasn't.

[hakey]

Observing the latest voting thread I think it might be an idea to seriously consider moving to secret ballot.

I'm not saying that anything dodgy has happened, and I would hope that no one has been tempted to vote tactically, but some of the voting patterns are pretty much what might be expect were a degree of tactical voting going on.

No doubt this is all just a coincidence and any suspicions ill-founded, but the only way to avoid any suggestion of unfairness for future contests would be to move to a secret ballot.

Thoughts?

[hakey]

woops - meant to edit the above post

[bmrzycki]

Observing the latest voting thread I think it might be an idea to seriously consider moving to secret ballot.

To be honest I'm getting burned out managing the presets and the voting thread. Moving it to private ballot makes me want to step down and let someone else take the lead. I'd still place the final presets on the PatchLib though.

If anyone else wants to step up I'll happliy pass the job on to them.

[satYatunes]

My request since I started participating in this contest was not to show the tally in the voting thread. If we implement secret balot then I guess that will also happen. Right? In that case, I am game for it. Also, I can volunteer if you need an extra hand.

[UncleAge]

Observing the latest voting thread I think it might be an idea to seriously consider moving to secret ballot.

I'm not saying that anything dodgy has happened, and I would hope that no one has been tempted to vote tactically, but some of the voting patterns are pretty much what might be expect were a degree of tactical voting going on.

No doubt this is all just a coincidence and any suspicions ill-founded, but the only way to avoid any suggestion of unfairness for future contests would be to move to a secret ballot.

Thoughts?

I don't understand what's sparking this comment.

[hakey]

Observing the latest voting thread

I don't understand what's sparking this comment.

Like I say, the voting is kind of what I'd would expect *if* some votes had been placed tactically.

NOTE: I'm not saying that that's what has happened, and I'm certainly not pointing the finger at anyone in particular! It may well be that's just the way the votes have fallen this time.

My wider point is that, with the prize offered being of significant monetary value, it seems to me far from ideal that we have this open voting system in which the votes of those placed earlier may, in a number of different ways, influence the votes that follow.